A jury
found Carl Lee Jackson ("Defendant") guilty of
murder in the first degree, armed criminal action, and
burglary in the first degree based on events that occurred in
October 2014.[1] The jury assessed
and declared punishment for these offenses -mandatory life in
prison without eligibility for probation or parole for murder
in the first degree, twenty years for armed criminal action,
and fifteen years for burglary in the first degree. The trial
court imposed that punishment, and ordered the sentences to
run concurrently with each other. Defendant appeals
challenging in two points the sufficiency of the evidence to
support the jury's verdict finding him guilty of murder
in the first degree, and a single comment in the
prosecutor's closing argument. We reject Defendant's
points, and affirm the trial court's judgment.

Procedural
History and Evidence Presented at Trial

Defendant
was charged by amended information with (1) murder in the
first degree in that Defendant "after deliberation,
knowingly caused the death of [Victim] by shooting him,
" (2) armed criminal action in that Defendant committed
the murder "by . . . the knowing use, assistance and aid
of a deadly weapon, " (3) burglary in the first degree
in that Defendant unlawfully entered Victim's home for
the purpose of committing theft, and (4) robbery in the first
degree in that Defendant "forcibly stole [a] British
.303 rifle owned by [Victim]" based on events that
occurred in October 2014.

The
jury was presented with the following evidence.[2] Robert Jackson, who was Defendant's
nephew and one of Defendant's male accomplices, testified
as follows. Defendant is "at least . . . about ten
years" older than Robert.[3] Defendant and Robert
"occasionally" sold "weed" together.
Richard Knee, who also was known as Junior and was
Defendant's second male accomplice, was Robert's
"distant cousin." Defendant's female accomplice
was Tomi Stanley. Robert "met [Tomi] through [Richard],
" and Tomi "would buy weed from" Robert.

In
October 2014, based on what Tomi told the men, Robert
expected to find a "whole lot of marijuana" at
Victim's - Robert's "estimation" was
"25 pounds or more." On October 22nd, Defendant,
Richard and Robert drove in Defendant's truck to
Tomi's house. Before leaving for Tomi's house, Robert
and Defendant placed an "AR-15, " an
"AR-22" and a "Ruger .22" under the
backseat of Defendant's truck. While at Defendant's
house, Defendant got three masks - one for himself, and one
each for Robert and Richard - to use later at Victim's
house. At Tomi's house, Tomi told the men "where . .
. all the weed would be and how the house was set up."
Tomi said the men should enter the back door, which
"lead[s] into the victim's room." Tomi then
drove the three men to Victim's house in Tomi's
automobile. Each of the men had a "gun." During the
drive, Tomi told the men they:

would encounter three males in the sitting room. Two were to
be about my age, a little bit younger, that they would not
fight back, that they would just do what we wanted them to,
and the other one would carry a key around his neck leading
to the safe where all the weed was.

When
the group arrived at Victim's house, Tomi "said she
was going to wait in the car." Defendant instructed
Robert and Richard to put on their masks, but declined to
wear his own mask because "he said he could not breathe
in it, so he took it off, and he had his hood up on his
hoodie." Robert and Richard wore their masks. Defendant
entered Victim's house first, then Robert followed by
Richard. On entering the house, Robert "heard a man
start cussing, a dog start barking, and then I heard a
gunshot go off." The men told the people in the house
"to get on the ground, " and then Robert "was
told" to take "[a] younger man" "into the
kitchen." From the kitchen, Robert could see an
"elderly woman" "sitting in a chair in front
of the TV."[4] Defendant told
Robert to "tie [the man and woman] up." Robert did
so. While Robert "was dealing with the people in the
living room, " Robert "heard some yelling, and then
. . . some more gunshots." Robert then heard
"[l]et's go, " and the three men left
Victim's house by the same door they came in. As Robert
left the house, he observed Victim lying on the ground.
"A couple of canisters" that smelled "like
weed and a rifle" were taken from Victim's house.

Tomi
had left while the three men were inside Victim's house
so the men "ran up" a dirt road and "laid down
in the grass" in a clearing. After a time, Tomi
returned, picked the three men up and returned to her house.
The three men than "loaded up the truck" and left.
Subsequently, Robert told Defendant that Robert
"wanted" an "antique" "British .303
rifle" and "kind of took it." Robert
"wasn't aware [the rifle had come from Victim's
house], but . . . had a suspicion."

Richard
Knee, Jr. also testified, and added the following evidence.
Richard met Defendant through Robert. "[A]t various
times, " Richard and Robert "engaged in selling
marijuana." Tomi is Richard's aunt, and Tomi and
Richard were close. Richard learned about Victim through
Tomi. Richard acknowledged that Defendant and Robert had
rifles at Victim's house, but denied that Richard had a
gun; however, Richard Tyrell ("Ty") Hackett, who
was Victim's friend and present in Victim's home when
Victim was shot, testified that all three men were
"armed" - "[o]ne was a long gun" and Ty
"believe[d] two were pistols." Victim's mother
also testified that "all three of those men had
guns."

Richard
testified that the three men knocked on Victim's front
door, but actually entered Victim's house through a door
"at the end of the trailer" that led into a
bedroom. Robert wore a mask, Richard had a mask on the top of
his head but did not pull the mask down over his face, and
Defendant did not have a mask.[5] As Defendant entered Victim's house,
Defendant "shot the dog."[6] The dog was not posing any threat to
Defendant to Richard's knowledge.[7] Victim was never tied up. Richard was with
Victim in the bedroom, and Victim "was supposed to be
opening the safe." Victim got a pistol "off the top
of the safe, " and pointed the pistol at
Richard.[8]

Richard
"put [his] hands up and hollered for [Defendant], and
told him that he had a gun." Defendant "come around
the corner and [Defendant and Victim] started arguing."
Each was telling the other to put the gun down, and Victim
also "was telling us to leave his house." Victim
"was moving the gun back and forth from" Richard to
Defendant. Defendant told Victim he was going to count to
three; then counted one, two and shot Victim three times. To
Richard, "[i]t looked like" Victim was shot in the
leg.[9]Defendant then "opened the
safe" and handed Richard two jars - one jar was empty
and one jar contained empty sandwich bags. Richard was not
aware of any other property being taken out of Victim's
house that night. Defendant "seem[ed] calm" when he
counted, when he shot Victim, and when he looked through
Victim's safe after shooting Victim. When the three men
left Victim's house, Defendant and Robert still were
"armed, " and when Richard last saw Victim, Victim
"was still talking." A day or two later, Defendant
told Richard that Victim died. Defendant also
"threatened to kill [Richard] and [his] family multiple
times."

In the
evening on October 22, 2014, McDonald County Sheriff Michael
Hall responded to a reported "shooting in a home
invasion." Sheriff Hall was the first law enforcement
officer to arrive at the scene. Sheriff Hall also is an
"EMT, " and determined Victim was dead. Sheriff
Hall observed a dead dog inside Victim's house, and a
shell casing near the dog.[10] Sheriff Hall also observed through a
"pretty large crack" an unknown number of marijuana
plants in a locked room in Victim's house. Sheriff Hall
took a picture of Victim that shows a wound in Victim's
"upper left chest" - Sheriff Hall described the
wound as "right above his left . . . nipple area."
Sheriff Hall observed "[s]everal - I would assume at the
time it was bullet entry wounds" on Victim, and blood on
and around Victim.[11] Sheriff Hall
also testified that "[t]here was some indications that
[Victim] was also shot in the groin area." One shell
casing was located "underneath" Victim.

Joseph
Houdyshell, "a narcotics detective with Ozarks Drug
Enforcement team, " told the jury the following. In a
search of Defendant's home in March 2015, a "lower
for an AR-15 rifle" and a "British .303 rifle"
were seized. Defendant and Robert were present in the home at
the time of the search. The "lower" includes the
"trigger mechanism and the butt stock" and does not
include "the bolt, the chamber, and the
barrel."[12] Defendant
told Detective Houdyshell that the "lower" was
Defendant's, and Defendant sold the "upper" to
a person "in Grove."[13] Defendant told Detective Houdyshell the
British .303 rifle "was Robert's."

Brandon
Barrett, a lieutenant with the McDonald County Sheriff's
Department, "collect[ed] physical evidence" at
Victim's house. According to Lt. Barrett, the dog at
Victim's house "looked as though it had [died] as a
result of a gunshot wound." In the "immediate
vicinity" of the dog, law enforcement officers
"collected two spent .223 [shell] casings" - one of
which was found by a doorway. A third spent .223 shell casing
was found in Victim's bedroom. Lt. Barrett received an
upper for a .223 AR-15 from a person who lived with Defendant
"within a couple of days" after Defendant
"acknowledged" "he had . . . the lower to an
AR-15." Lt. Barrett sent the three shell casings from
Victim's home, the lower of the AR-15 seized in the
search of Defendant's home and the upper of the AR-15
received from a person who lived with Defendant to the crime
lab "[t]o see if they could get a match on the shell
casings and the . . . weapon itself." The shell casings
recovered from Victim's home that were sent to the crime
lab "matched the - were fired from the AR-15 . . . of
[Defendant]." Victim's "family" told law
enforcement that a British .303 rifle was taken in the
"incident, " and subsequently provided law
enforcement with a serial number for the rifle that matched
the serial number of the British .303 rifle seized in the
search of Defendant's home.[14]

Alexander
A. Belt, who was employed by the Missouri State Highway
Patrol crime laboratory division, testified as follows. Mr.
Belt's "specialty is" "[f]irearm and tool
marks." Mr. Belt concluded that the shell casings
recovered from Victim's home were "fired from"
the combined lower of an AR-15 seized from Defendant's
home and upper of an AR-15 received by Lt. Barrett from a
person who lived with Defendant.

Defendant
did not testify, and did not call any witnesses.

Early
in the prosecutor's closing argument, the following
argument, objection and ruling occurred:

Both of our witnesses at the scene put [Defendant] as the
first man in the door. [Defendant] was carrying a weapon, his
weapon, this weapon, a .223 AR-15 assault rifle, and when he
came through that door into the back of [Victim's] room,
the first thing he did was shoot the dog. Now, was the dog a
threat? Pretty much everybody who testified said no. It might
bark, but he wasn't aggressive. I don't think that
[Defendant] killed the dog because he was aggressive.
[Defendant] killed the dog because he was ready to -

[Defense Counsel]: Objection, your Honor. It's
speculation.

THE COURT: You can draw reasonable inference, so it's
...

Our website includes the first part of the main text of the court's opinion.
To read the entire case, you must purchase the decision for download. With purchase,
you also receive any available docket numbers, case citations or footnotes, dissents
and concurrences that accompany the decision.
Docket numbers and/or citations allow you to research a case further or to use a case in a
legal proceeding. Footnotes (if any) include details of the court's decision. If the document contains a simple affirmation or denial without discussion,
there may not be additional text.

Buy This Entire Record For
$7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.